Quote:
From Tolkien's Letter # 207, about his initial review of the proposed movie's storyline:
...this document, as it stands, is sufficient to give me grave anxiety about the actual dialogue that (I suppose) will be used....
|
Do we have complaints about the dialogue? Then he would have had more.
Quote:
|
I feel very unhappy about...his complete lack of respect for the original (it seems wilfully wrong without discernible technical reasons at nearly every point).
|
Most people's complaints have to do with Jackson erring from the Tolkien original text in some manner that[list=a][*]has no discernable technical reason (i.e., appears not to be done for the reason that the author's version would not translate well to a movie medium)[*]appears to be just the scriptwriters' version of how it should have happened[*]purports to increase the drama[/list=a]It would be my judgment that at least Peter Jackson did not have a "complete lack of respect for the original," though of the complaints that I have, most of them fall into one of the above categories.
Quote:
|
But I need, and shall soon need very much indeed, money, and I am conscious of your [Allen and Unwin, his English book publishers] rights and interests; so that I shall endeavour to restrain myself, and avoid all avoidable offence.
|
I think he was primarily driven by a desire to increase the revenue from the book--both for himself and his publisher. At the time (1957-1958), the book was not providing a large income for him. Neither would the movie rights have been sold for very much money.
I could speculate along the economics line that when an author is not well known, not a best seller, and not rich from his books, he would be more eager to get publicity and be a little less inclined to nitpick at such a movie idea and its storyline or script. And I think he VERY seriously took this proposed animated movie apart with criticism.
Suppose, however, that Tolkien were already a best selling author, was sitting rich on a Smaug-like hoard, and had the acclaim and "personal power" that comes from having his work voted best book of the century. (He also would have been
one hundred seven years old when Peter Jackson began on his movie!)
In such a case, the movie rights would have been quite valuable. He could much better afford to negotiate his choice between "Art" or "Money." And if he preferred Art (as I am inclined to believe), he could then have been a lot more picky.
